Look, I've said it before and I'll say it again. Contempt of Congress against a sitting Attorney General of the United States is about as toothless a censure as you can get.

When Congress votes to put an Attorney General in contempt of Congress, the next step in the procedure is that they will have to go to the Attorney General that they just voted to be in contempt of Congress and ask him nicely for a special prosecutor to investigate himself. The Attorney General would appoint a special prosecutor who would dick around for 2 or 3 years and then release a statement that it's dropping the investigation for lack of information of wrongdoing.

RexTalionis:Look, I've said it before and I'll say it again. Contempt of Congress against a sitting Attorney General of the United States is about as toothless a censure as you can get.

When Congress votes to put an Attorney General in contempt of Congress, the next step in the procedure is that they will have to go to the Attorney General that they just voted to be in contempt of Congress and ask him nicely for a special prosecutor to investigate himself. The Attorney General would appoint a special prosecutor who would dick around for 2 or 3 years and then release a statement that it's dropping the investigation for lack of information of wrongdoing.

the best part? the opposition party knows that they can't change that procedure (even if they had that sort of authority, which is questionable) without eventually shooting themselves in the foot later on down the road. so the GOP will make noises, they'll pretend to be outraged - hell, maybe they really ARE outraged...who knows? that said, at the end of the day nobody will do a damn thing about this.

Dinki:Excuse me if I don't get upset about Obama blocking a request from the congress that has made a major production out of every little thing, real or imaginary, that they could glom on to.

And yes, while Fast and furious was not well thought out, it was in the end a FARKING insignificant thing.

In what universe is our government arming violent drug militants on our border who use those guns to kill civilians and law enforcement officials a FARKING insignificant thing? It's significant enough for the White House to take steps to ensure the truth never sees the light of day.

AmazinTim:Dinki: Excuse me if I don't get upset about Obama blocking a request from the congress that has made a major production out of every little thing, real or imaginary, that they could glom on to.

And yes, while Fast and furious was not well thought out, it was in the end a FARKING insignificant thing.

In what universe is our government arming violent drug militants on our border who use those guns to kill civilians and law enforcement officials a FARKING insignificant thing? It's significant enough for the White House to take steps to ensure the truth never sees the light of day.

Well, most of those people who ended up dead were probably brown people, and they don't count, apparently.

AmazinTim:In what universe is our government arming violent drug militants on our border who use those guns to kill civilians and law enforcement officials a FARKING insignificant thing?

When you phrase it like that, you're right on. However, if you describe what happened HONESTLY, in that a plan to track cartel movements backfired and got guns into the hands of people that already had thousands and thousands of weapons, affecting their combat readiness by 0.00%, the failure did absolutely NOTHING, NOTHING AT ALL but cost the country whatever loss we ate in the weapon transaction itself.

AmazinTim:In what universe is our government arming violent drug militants on our border who use those guns to kill civilians and law enforcement officials a FARKING insignificant thing? It's significant enough for the White House to take steps to ensure the truth never sees the light of day.

of course it's a big deal...but one does not simply punish law enforcement when they screw up. Oh no..that is simply not done. Give the machinery some time...they'll brew up a right proper scapegoat for the media to chew on. Obama will frown, the GOP will howl...and then within a couple/few weeks we'll all forget about the mess and move on with life.

ferretman:How can Obama use 'Executive Privilege' if he never saw the documents? - per Holders testimony.

Because he's the President. the Prez says executive whammy jammy applies, then guess what? it applies! that's how it works. you can thank the past oh...several presidents for setting that up for Obama.

Now...if the Republicans want to weaken the concept of executive privilege, i'm all for it!

WTF Indeed:Who wants to bet that the documents paint both Obama and Bush DOJs in a bad light?

If you read Holders letter to Obama, he clearly states that congress is looking for "documents from after February 4, 2011, related to the department's response to Congress".

So they aren't even interested in looking at the actual mechanics of the program, or even who knew what about it. All they are looking for is some kind of 'gotcha' document showing the Administration trying to cover up or lie to congress.

James!:WTF Indeed: James!: I'm guessing the documents reveal ongoing operations in the war on drugs including tactics and information regarding prosecutions off offenders.

But conspiracies are good too.

If that was the case, a private meeting with the committee would have cleared all those issues up. No Congressman wants to be accused of putting LEOs in danger.

I don't think the Whitehouse respects the committee enough to give them the private meeting. They (and I) view this whole thing as a pointless witch hunt during an election year.

Yeah pretty much this. A private meeting with the committee would have cleared up that they will forge ahead with this for once kind of right in the broken clock sense but obviously political witch hunt no matter what. In fact the very act of exerting executive privilege may be as a result of a private meeting with the committee, whereby they pledged to never stop ever until this was totes finished, and Obama or his representative(s) said "well actually..."

Dinki:WTF Indeed: Who wants to bet that the documents paint both Obama and Bush DOJs in a bad light?

If you read Holders letter to Obama, he clearly states that congress is looking for "documents from after February 4, 2011, related to the department's response to Congress".

So they aren't even interested in looking at the actual mechanics of the program, or even who knew what about it. All they are looking for is some kind of 'gotcha' document showing the Administration trying to cover up or lie to congress.

Weaver95:Now...if the Republicans want to weaken the concept of executive privilege, i'm all for it!

Which obviously would open up a whole other can of worms. Executive Privilege (like the War Powers Act) is something the other party beats its chest about when they're not in control of the White House, but neither side really wants a resolution in the chance that they may come down on the losing side.

WTF Indeed:James!: I don't think the Whitehouse respects the committee enough to give them the private meeting. They (and I) view this whole thing as a pointless witch hunt during an election year.

Hoping the story gets dragged on to support the "do nothing claim" can be dangerous 5 months before an election.

I'm having trouble making sense of that comment.

I think you're saying that this could blow up in their faces, and it could. But I think the gamble is give them nothing and they get a news cycle out of being blocked or give over whatever documents they want (and it seems like they're asking for tangentially related documents at this point) and give the republicans more ammo that they can slowly release for the next five months.

The story is being mired down in procedural shiat at this point. I doubt there will be a swell of interest.

The fun of bringing up Nixon and executive privilege for something all public answers have stated Obama and the White house knew nothing about. I will be a fun court fight with Obama's position based on UNITED STATES v. NIXON, 418 U.S. 683 (1974). If Obama comes on TV and says I am not a crook it will be a picture. The cover up is always worse than the act, just rip the bandage off and admit the stupid to move on. Holder has already mislead or lied to congress and there are whistleblowers that have filled some gaps.

what's really sad about this story is that it really isn't all that unique. the 'war on drugs' is so out of control, so insane that operations like 'fast and furious' (such an asinine name) are considered legitimately good tactics by people who run the show.

Now to be fair, the President isn't involved in the day to day operations of the war on drugs. he doesn't get daily sitreps, he's not in the loop when it comes to planning everything. In fact, the war on drugs is run almost entirely by people who CANNOT be fired, not even by the President. that war machine is literally unkillable. NOBODY can stop it. At best, maybe, they can shift its focus slightly.

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat:Weaver95: Now...if the Republicans want to weaken the concept of executive privilege, i'm all for it!

Which obviously would open up a whole other can of worms. Executive Privilege (like the War Powers Act) is something the other party beats its chest about when they're not in control of the White House, but neither side really wants a resolution in the chance that they may come down on the losing side.

shhh! let 'em do it. I want 'em to do it! c'mon Republicans! strip away executive privilege! it's being used for EVIL! you don't like evil, right? DO IT!

Chindit:Those cartels would NEVER have been able to get guns without this program.

So, since the Mexican Drug cartel HAD guns, it is insignificant how the DEA handled this hairbrained abortion?

The only problem I have with the Fast and Furious program is that the guns worked. I think the DEA should be looking into how these guns get into the hands of the Cartels and then shutting the pipelines down.